Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract

The social protection workforce, and particularly frontline workers delivering social assistance and social care, needs greater attention (in research, policy and practice) to provide the services that can respond to economic and social vulnerabilities.

Contribution long abstract

- Social protection systems strengthening has focused on "hardware": PMT, MIS, AI, banking, etc., less on the workforce required to deliver these programmes, and especially at local level.

- In many places, the Ministries responsible for social assistance were historically those responsible for social care.

- Large "standalone" programs disconnect social care entirely from social assistance, whilst, when integrated to Welfare Ministries, the workforce gets diverted away from care, to focus on administrative tasks.

- "Multi-purpose" cash can be misleading into thinking that cash alone responds to multi-faceted issues. Cash "plus" language puts centrality on income, considering the rest as a bonus. But social care and social assistance are part and parcel of social protection. A conditional approach blurs the line between incentivising, supporting and penalising families who may face complex situations, that cash alone may not solve.

- Inclusive social protection is a pleonasm; social protection was designed to address risks around vulnerability and marginalisation, in part captured through "categorical" social assistance (the notion of 'disability extra costs' is very helpful to understand this ie the combination of economic poverty and other costs compound vulnerability risks for persons with disability). These vulnerabilities are not easily captured in PMT processes, but they are easily captured when channeled through a social care approach. More focus and investment is needed.

- The emerging literature on care and support systems, and social protection, where women and gender are central concerns, is really helpful going forward.